new mexico cross country women

joedirt wrote:

No, developing British talent should be left to UK Athletics, not the tax payers in the state of New Mexico.

Boohoo

Bayouself2 wrote:

Those birthdays are about as trustworthy as Obama's birth certificate. They are all made up. So what next? One hit wonder.

I got a chuckle out of this, not sure why...:)

Bayouself2 wrote:

Notice that they don't put their date of birth in their profile.. Because they ARE ALL 25 and from GB. - it's the American way "find some way to cheat the system". Not butthurt here just calling a spade a spade. I'm happy the university won, just don't like to see the way that they stoop to do it.

when you see a coach resort to foreign born "ringers" who are already established runners, you have a coach who is out of options and would have a team like Texas or the "new" SMU (sans icelandic influences). The guy should be ashamed of himself.

I didn't see anyone give last year's individual winner a bad time. What's the big deal this year?

Marti Vainio wrote:

Bayouself2 wrote:

Notice that they don't put their date of birth in their profile.. Because they ARE ALL 25 and from GB. - it's the American way "find some way to cheat the system". Not butthurt here just calling a spade a spade. I'm happy the university won, just don't like to see the way that they stoop to do it.

when you see a coach resort to foreign born "ringers" who are already established runners, you have a coach who is out of options and would have a team like Texas or the "new" SMU (sans icelandic influences). The guy should be ashamed of himself.

Does the NM girls team really differ from that of an Oregon team, or Stanford?

Lots, and lots of blue chippers on the rosters of the top programs.

Fact Checker wrote:

Marti Vainio wrote:

when you see a coach resort to foreign born "ringers" who are already established runners, you have a coach who is out of options and would have a team like Texas or the "new" SMU (sans icelandic influences). The guy should be ashamed of himself.

Does the NM girls team really differ from that of an Oregon team, or Stanford?

Lots, and lots of blue chippers on the rosters of the top programs.

Not sure but I'm guessing more than two members of Oregon's and Stanford's top 5 have been on the team and training under their coach for longer than 3 months? Didn't take the time to look.

You are correct regarding Oregon. Their top runners were Cash, Neer, Grabill, Berge and Maton--all Americans, except Berge, who is from Scandanavia, All of these girls have been with the program for at least two years. Stanford very seldom has foreign runners on their women's team, and I believe that is the case again. Is it wrong to recruit a team full of mature foreign runners to win a championship? At least Cheserek has been with the Oregon program for three years and is working his way toward US citizenship.

iona last year wrote:

I didn't see anyone give last year's individual winner a bad time. What's the big deal this year?

Slivery Slope wrote:

You are correct regarding Oregon. Their top runners were Cash, Neer, Grabill, Berge and Maton--all Americans, except Berge, who is from Scandanavia, All of these girls have been with the program for at least two years. Stanford very seldom has foreign runners on their women's team, and I believe that is the case again. Is it wrong to recruit a team full of mature foreign runners to win a championship? At least Cheserek has been with the Oregon program for three years and is working his way toward US citizenship.

this!

Franklin is strange

I'm gonna mimic a post a read elsewhere and say.... Do you think for one moment that Wetmore (or Oregon or Stanford) would have turned away Auckland (via Scotland), Renfer (via Harvard-Switzerland), or Frerichs (via UMKC) if they had knocked on his door earlier this year asking if they could run? Would he have said, "sorry, we know your pretty fast, but you have the wrong passport - or sorry, but you are just a 5th year transfer"? Of course not, he would have handed them Buff kits darn quick!

It is also not all just one-and-done at UNM. Franklin is getting Wright for 5 years (and can't recall her being recruited by anyone at the time?) and getting Auckland for 2 years. Of course Franklin would rather get all these runners when they were 18 or 19 years old - but that doesn't mean he should not take them as 5th year transfers (Frerichs and Renfer) or as a junior (Auckland) when the opportunity arises. I didn't see Stanford saying no to Maksim Korolev (via Harvard) a few years ago when the same opportunity arose for them.

I'm sure Franklin is trying to use this year's success to recruit the best he can from US and abroad. If Franklin has strong connections to GB through Wright and Auckland then he would be crazy to NOT use them.

Go Lobos!!

this repeated tax payer argument against giving scholarships to foreign runners is idiotic. These schools all get a lot of revenue (tuition) from foreign students that pay full freight tuition. Plus, all the states get tax revenue from foreign tourists, investors, and companies doing business in their state which they pass in-part to the state schools. So, if it makes you feel better, then all schools can simply 'earmark' revenue/tuition dollars from foreign sources to support scholarships for foreign athletes.

There. Done. Now you can sleep better knowing that they are not using your tax dollars.

OR - why would you feel better if your NM tax dollars supported another girl that is not fit enough to even train with Auckland and Wright on an easy day? That would be a waste of tax dollars...

I'd rather UNM use my tax dollars on getting the best student athletes (like Franklin is doing) no matter where they are from. This year, it has been a great return on investment for the State of NM.

Slivery Slope wrote:

Is it wrong to recruit a team full of mature foreign runners to win a championship?

You mean like "one & done" basketball?

kinda nice to see lrcers complaining about some white women dominating - sort of reassuring. Because some people call racism on this sort of thing - if it had been 5 Kenyans winning NC's and people complained...you know this would be a race thread in around 60 seconds.

So good job lrcers.

Stanford doesn't need to recruit foreign athletes because the value of their education and degrees allow for them to select from the top domestic talent. The UNM's of the world don't have this luxury. Perhaps if they string together a few year's of success this will change (see OSU, Northern AZ, etc.). Franklin is doing everything right. If it were so easy to just bring in foreign talent and win every race then you'd see every school doing it. Not the case, and not so easy. Congrats to the Lobos and the University's first championship program.

Also, tax payers in the state of NM provide only 12% of UNMs operating budget. See

http://www.unm.edu/~budget/consolidatedbudget/ConsolidatedRevenue2014.pdf

So, people making this argument are unhappy with supporting 12% of the scholarship? Again, this would be very easy for schools to replace with 'earmarked' tuition dollars from non-US sources. Then our isolationist friends can sleep better knowing that none of their personal tax dollars are being used to help non- US citizens.

GO LOBOS!! I hope Alice and Rhona have some fast 18-19 year old friends back in GB to recommend to Franklin if he is unable to get potential all-american talent here in the States.

tax argument baseless wrote:

Also, tax payers in the state of NM provide only 12% of UNMs operating budget. See

http://www.unm.edu/~budget/consolidatedbudget/ConsolidatedRevenue2014.pdf

So, people making this argument are unhappy with supporting 12% of the scholarship? Again, this would be very easy for schools to replace with 'earmarked' tuition dollars from non-US sources. Then our isolationist friends can sleep better knowing that none of their personal tax dollars are being used to help non- US citizens.

GO LOBOS!! I hope Alice and Rhona have some fast 18-19 year old friends back in GB to recommend to Franklin if he is unable to get potential all-american talent here in the States.

bad reading of the financials. Here are the totals of taxpayer funded status of the U:

State: 12.0

Federal: 2.5

Local: 4.2

State bonds: 1.1

Tuition (mostly in-state): 8.2

Total is more like 20-28%, depending on how you consider tuition.

agip wrote:

kinda nice to see lrcers complaining about some white women dominating - sort of reassuring. Because some people call racism on this sort of thing - if it had been 5 Kenyans winning NC's and people complained...you know this would be a race thread in around 60 seconds.

So good job lrcers.

Yes, lrc, good job on being xenophobic rather than merely racist. If you discriminate against EVERYONE who isn't quite like you, rather than just those who don't LOOK quite like you, then people are less likely to call you out on it. Bravo!

Bravo lrc! wrote:

agip wrote:

kinda nice to see lrcers complaining about some white women dominating - sort of reassuring. Because some people call racism on this sort of thing - if it had been 5 Kenyans winning NC's and people complained...you know this would be a race thread in around 60 seconds.

So good job lrcers.

Yes, lrc, good job on being xenophobic rather than merely racist. If you discriminate against EVERYONE who isn't quite like you, rather than just those who don't LOOK quite like you, then people are less likely to call you out on it. Bravo!

right well I'll take xenophobia over racism any time.

And it's not really xenophobia - more a sense of lack of fair play, a sense of shortcuts taken.

This thread is point less without pics.